LNER unreliability caused by staff shortages

[43066]

I suppose I asked for that, sorry.

There is also non-contractual overtime in terms of extending an existing shift to cover extra work, though.

But yes, it is official policy now, rather than just everyone choosing to do it themselves anyway.

No worries - it seems pretty clear to me this covers non contractual RDW and also, as you say, things like doing additional factors at the end of a shift etc.

 

[Bungle73]

ASLEF have announced today that it has withdrawn non-contractual overtime from 27th November

'Flying on favours': ASLEF withdraws overtime on LNER | ASLEF

ASLEF announced today [Tuesday] that it has withdrawn all non-contractual overtime at LNER on the East Coast main line from Sunday 27 November.

aslef.org.uk

How big an effect is likely to have on services? I'm travelling at the beginning of December, and now it's got me worried........

 

[800001]

How big an effect is likely to have on services? I'm travelling at the beginning of December, and now it's got me worried........

It will be pretty much like it is now, adhoc cancellations announced day before.

Rosters will try and cover turns with spare staff, some drivers will still work overtime (as they have also worked when strike day), when the shifts are then still uncovered, it will then be when trains are cancelled.

 

[Bungle73]

It will be pretty much like it is now, adhoc cancellations announced day before.

Rosters will try and cover turns with spare staff, some drivers will still work overtime (as they have also worked when strike day), when the shifts are then still uncovered, it will then be when trains are cancelled.

Hmm...thanks.

 

[DanNCL]

Surely it would make sense to remove a few services from the timetable like they did a few years ago on the Leeds route - I seem to recall the 09:03 and 15:03 departures from Kings X and associated returns from Leeds were removed from the timetable for a while, although that was a combination of staff being taken out for training on the 80xs, the 90s being returned to DB and the 91s being well… 91s! (Quite why they kept some of the more temperamental ones like 127 I don’t know but that’s off topic for this thread!)

Of course this time many of the issues seem to be on the Scottish route, so this time it would need to be some Scottish trips cut, as well as possibly some on the Leeds route.
It would give both passengers and staff alike more confidence in which services will and won’t run.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Yes, but you're not going to know which services to remove until you know which turns are going to be uncovered. They will be different trains each day

Surely it would make sense to remove a few services from the timetable like they did a few years ago on the Leeds route - I seem to recall the 09:03 and 15:03 departures from Kings X and associated returns from Leeds were removed from the timetable for a while, although that was a combination of staff being taken out for training on the 80xs, the 90s being returned to DB and the 91s being well… 91s! (Quite why they kept some of the more temperamental ones like 127 I don’t know but that’s off topic for this thread!)

Of course this time many of the issues seem to be on the Scottish route, so this time it would need to be some Scottish trips cut, as well as possibly some on the Leeds route.
It would give both passengers and staff alike more confidence in which services will and won’t run.

 

[800001]

B

Surely it would make sense to remove a few services from the timetable like they did a few years ago on the Leeds route - I seem to recall the 09:03 and 15:03 departures from Kings X and associated returns from Leeds were removed from the timetable for a while, although that was a combination of staff being taken out for training on the 80xs, the 90s being returned to DB and the 91s being well… 91s! (Quite why they kept some of the more temperamental ones like 127 I don’t know but that’s off topic for this thread!)

Of course this time many of the issues seem to be on the Scottish route, so this time it would need to be some Scottish trips cut, as well as possibly some on the Leeds route.
It would give both passengers and staff alike more confidence in which services will and won’t run.

But it’s different turns each day, so yes, while it would be a sensible move to remove set services, in theory it wouldn’t work.

Although at times it does seem to be same services been altered, that’s due to how the Newcastle lodge link operates, which makes the north of Edinburgh services a possibility to pre alter.

 

[DanNCL]

Yes, but you're not going to know which services to remove until you know which turns are going to be uncovered. They will be different trains each day

But it’s different turns each day, so yes, while it would be a sensible move to remove set services, in theory it wouldn’t work.

Although at times it does seem to be same services been altered, that’s due to how the Newcastle lodge link operates, which makes the north of Edinburgh services a possibility to pre alter.

But surely that’s one of the reasons to axe services from the timetable. As on the occasions that the staff are available for a service that’s removed from the timetable, they can be reallocated to one that wouldn’t otherwise have been covered. I know it won’t always be as simple as that in practice, but that’s basically the idea of it.

The Inverness service from what I keep reading seems to cause more hassle than it’s worth. I don’t know how busy it is north of Edinburgh as I’ve not used it there since the HST era, but if it isn’t overly busy one does have to wonder if it would be better to axe it north of Edinburgh entirely or to cut it back to either Perth or Stirling. Cutting it back to Edinburgh or Stirling would have the additional benefit of reducing the number of diagrams that can’t use 801s.

 

[dk1]

It will be pretty much like it is now, adhoc cancellations announced day before.

Rosters will try and cover turns with spare staff, some drivers will still work overtime (as they have also worked when strike day), when the shifts are then still uncovered, it will then be when trains are cancelled.

I’m shocked that some have worked on a strike day. Where these not in the union? It’s very rare indeed with drivers & certainly not happened at my TOC.

 

[43066]

But surely that’s one of the reasons to axe services from the timetable. As on the occasions that the staff are available for a service that’s removed from the timetable, they can be reallocated to one that wouldn’t otherwise have been covered. I know it won’t always be as simple as that in practice, but that’s basically the idea of it.

No, because you can’t just move staff off their booked diagrams with a few hours’ notice. Especially when those staff have decided not to cooperate due to the way they’re being treated by the company.

I’m shocked that some have worked on a strike day. Where these not in the union? It’s very rare indeed with drivers & certainly not happened at my TOC.

Managers might cover some trains?

 

[dk1]

No, because you can’t just move staff off their booked diagrams with a few hours’ notice. Especially when those staff have decided not to cooperate due to the way they’re being treated by the company.



Managers might cover some trains?

It was because the comment stated ‘some drivers will still work overtime’ without mentioning driver managers. Yes they drove on our strike days to cover but certainly not other drivers.

 

[43066]

It was because the comment stated ‘some drivers will still work overtime’ without mentioning driver managers. Yes they drove on our strike days to cover but certainly not other drivers.

It’s the same here. I don’t know a single one who would. Certainly nowhere near enough to make a difference.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

They’ve not given LNER much notice have they? They can hardly do anything to the rosters in the time given.

I’m shocked that some have worked on a strike day. Where these not in the union? It’s very rare indeed with drivers & certainly not happened at my TOC.

It’s not obligatory to be in the union, is it?

 

[12LDA28C]

It’s the same here. I don’t know a single one who would. Certainly nowhere near enough to make a difference.

Although the vast majority of drivers are in ASLEF, a small number are in the RMT or not in any union (most likely due to some historical grievance or other with the Union or its Reps) however even those not in ASLEF would most likely not cross another Union's picket line. It wouldn't make them particularly popular at work.

It’s not obligatory to be in the union, is it?

Why would a driver not be in the union? Unless of course they wanted to reap the benefits of collective bargaining and union negotiation without actually being a member. Rather like expecting to enjoy the benefits of being in a club without paying your membership fee which seems rather unfair on those who do pay.

 

[DanNCL]

No, because you can’t just move staff off their booked diagrams with a few hours’ notice. Especially when those staff have decided not to cooperate due to the way they’re being treated by the company.

Sometimes yes which is why I said it wouldn’t always work in practice.

But say, for example, the 15:03 from Kings Cross had crew but was removed from the timetable, and the 15:33 didn’t have crew but was in the timetable, it really shouldn’t be that difficult to move the crew to the alternative service.

 

[skyhigh]

But say, for example, the 15:03 from Kings Cross had crew but was removed from the timetable, and the 15:33 didn’t have crew but was in the timetable, it really shouldn’t be that difficult to move the crew to the alternative service.

Except the fact that it means an extension to the crew's day of at least 30 mins. Fair enough if terms and conditions allow that to happen without asking, but if not, you're relying on goodwill which just isn't there.

 

[DanNCL]

Except the fact that it means an extension to the crew's day of at least 30 mins. Fair enough if terms and conditions allow that to happen without asking, but if not, you're relying on goodwill which just isn't there.

You’d hope they had enough slack in their diagrams and contracted hours to allow that, seeing as they have to have it for delays.

 

[dk1]

They’ve not given LNER much notice have they? They can hardly do anything to the rosters in the time given.


It’s not obligatory to be in the union, is it?

I am struggling to think of a driver who isn’t.

LNER cannot change rosters. They can only change diagrams.

 

[43066]

You’d hope they had enough slack in their diagrams and contracted hours to allow that, seeing as they have to have it for delays.

Delays are different. You can be stuck for any amount of time on a delayed train you’re working, but can refuse to move off booked workings, or to work services that will take you over your day.

 

[12LDA28C]

You’d hope they had enough slack in their diagrams and contracted hours to allow that, seeing as they have to have it for delays.

I would say that's unlikely to be the case. Delays on the day is a different matter entirely.

 

[skyhigh]

You’d hope they had enough slack in their diagrams and contracted hours to allow that, seeing as they have to have it for delays.

That's not how diagrams work. They are timed to the minute and will not have 30+ mins slack at the end of the day.

Delays are a different thing. If your train is delayed, you will be expected to stay on and finish working it as required - which is fair enough, as say you were working a London-York as a York driver, if you got delayed on route from London it would be ridiculous to stop at Doncaster and refuse to work any further.

Pre-planned alterations that take you over your day require consent (unless their T&Cs have a clause that allows the company to change their shift).

 

[dk1]

Although the vast majority of drivers are in ASLEF, a small number are in the RMT or not in any union (most likely due to some historical grievance or other with the Union or its Reps) however even those not in ASLEF would most likely not cross another Union's picket line. It wouldn't make them particularly popular at work.

I do recall a driver in the 1990s who left the union for some reason at my depot where I was roster clerk at the time. He obviously didn’t have to cross a picket line but managers had already decided they would not allow or put him in that position with all the stress it would cause.

 

[DanNCL]

Delays are different. You can be stuck for any amount of time on a delayed train but can refuse to move off booked workings, or to work services that will take you over your day.

That’s just poor planning. There is no reason why this couldn’t be done if resources were actually managed effectively. Yes this is largely down to the DFT and their drive for cost cutting, but I find it absolutely ridiculous that a crew would refuse to be bumped back from the 15:03 to the 15:33, but would be perfectly happy to work the 15:03 running 30 minutes late leaving at 15:33!

What they really need to be doing is having a serious think about how many diagrams they can realistically cover on a daily basis, reduce the number of diagrams accordingly, and adjust the rosters in the long term plan to account for it.

 

[dk1]

That’s just poor planning. There is no reason why this couldn’t be done if resources were actually managed effectively. Yes this is largely down to the DFT and their drive for cost cutting, but I find it absolutely ridiculous that a crew would refuse to be bumped back from the 15:03 to the 15:33, but would be perfectly happy to work the 15:03 running 30 minutes late leaving at 15:33!

What they really need to be doing is having a serious think about how many diagrams they can realistically cover on a daily basis, reduce the number of diagrams accordingly, and adjust the rosters in the long term plan to account for it.

Trying to move a driver onto anything that is known to be as little as 1 minute over their initial finish time is enforced overtime & therefore against agreements.

 

[43066]

I find it absolutely ridiculous that a crew would refuse to be bumped back from the 15:03 to the 15:33, but would be perfectly happy to work the 15:03 running 30 minutes late leaving at 15:33!

They wouldn’t be perfectly happy and (if it was a London crew on an out and back) could likely refuse to work if if it departed late enough to take them over their day when they got back.

Similarly if two units need splitting to form two trains, there’s nobody booked to do it and nobody agrees to as a favour, the units will remain coupled and one train will likely need to be cancelled.

 

[Watershed]

That's not how diagrams work. They are timed to the minute and will not have 30+ mins slack at the end of the day.

Delays are a different thing. If your train is delayed, you will be expected to stay on and finish working it as required - which is fair enough, as say you were working a London-York as a York driver, if you got delayed on route from London it would be ridiculous to stop at Doncaster and refuse to work any further.

Pre-planned alterations that take you over your day require consent (unless their T&Cs have a clause that allows the company to change their shift).

It all depends on the terms and conditions at the end of the day. Pre-planned changes (usually those notified at least a few days in advance) can often extend diagrams by a certain margin.

Coming back to the example at hand, if the 15:03 were removed from the timetable on a pre-planned basis (not 10pm the night before!) then this would likely mean that the associated diagrams are cancelled and the crew revert to being spare. Again, then it's down to T&Cs as to what work they can be required to do instead.

It's all down to the T&Cs at the end of the day and some TOCs are suffering because, just like the NRCoT, some T&Cs are ambiguously drafted - leading to arguments over interpretation!

 

[DanNCL]

Trying to move a driver onto anything that is known to be as little as 1 minute over their initial finish time is enforced overtime & therefore against agreements.

They wouldn’t be perfectly happy and (if it was a London crew on an out and back) could likely refuse to work if if it departed late enough to take them over their day when they got back.

Diagrams should be shorter than contracted hours, yes? So the contracted hours would hopefully be long enough to cover it. If it’s within contracted hours frankly it should be tough luck if someone doesn’t like it.

Obviously it’s different if it’s not in contracted hours, but that raises the different issue of why aren’t contracted hours designed to allow for some level of flexibility. And the blame for that lies entirely with the DFT and the TOCs.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It will be pretty much like it is now, adhoc cancellations announced day before.

Rosters will try and cover turns with spare staff, some drivers will still work overtime (as they have also worked when strike day), when the shifts are then still uncovered, it will then be when trains are cancelled.

Why not an emergency timetable?

 

[skyhigh]

Diagrams should be shorter than contracted hours, yes? So the contracted hours would hopefully be long enough to cover it. If it’s within contracted hours frankly it should be tough luck if someone doesn’t like it.

I'm not sure you understand how diagramming actually works. In the link some weeks have more hours in than others, but over the link they match up exactly to an average which is the total contracted hours. So anything longer than the booked diagram is overtime.

Obviously it’s different if it’s not in contracted hours, but that raises the different issue of why aren’t contracted hours designed to allow for some level of flexibility. And the blame for that lies entirely with the DFT and the TOCs.

Simply because it adds cost. If you want extra hours, you either need to raise the contracted hours or add more staff. This is why the railway has run on overtime for decades.

 

[dk1]

Why not an emergency timetable?

That would be the most sensible option. If diagrams are cancelled then most drivers will be able to then be booked out onto modified diagrams as per depot rostering agreements. Local LDC reps will however be scrutinising all these diagrams for fairness. With fewer services & more stops to cover withdrawn trains it would hopefully offer more certainty for the travelling public in the short term. Most sensible approach would have been to not get into this situation in the first place. Let’s hope LNER manage to resolve the issues they appear to have created.